No, it's insane. It's been six years and they haven't suffered for it. Having them focus on two specific schools works with such a limited spell list. If you open it up to everything, you just end up making a mess.
A "mess" that gives players a lot more flexibility to create the characters they want to play. Sounds like a good thing to me. There's nothing inherently problematic about a roguish evoker or a fighter/illusionist and that inflexibility comes at the expense of literally any other character concept that'd otherwise fit the framework.
The restriction of school is yet another reason why the subclass is unsatisfying. Paladin's and Rangers don't have a restriction like that, and along with their tailored spell lists designed to work well with martial abilities, make far better gishes than the actual gish subclass.
The real question is, where do we stop with the unrestricting?
This is always a fascinating discussion, I could easily transfer The restriction of school is yet another reason why the subclass is unsatisfying to The restriction of proficiencies is yet another reason why the class is unsatisfying and then even further to The restriction of class is yet another reason why the system is unsatisfying.
Giving players freedom of choice is in many ways the fundamental aspect of Role Playing Games, you're taking on a role but you're free to do what you/your character wants. At the same time a lot of those choices are only meaningful in the face of restrictions.
Sometimes building something within limitations can be just as, maybe even more so, satisfying than building something without any limitations. At what point do the limitations become too restrictive though? At what point does choice become too much choice? I think the answer will be entirely up to each person.
I can definitely see why people want more choice in schools available, especially if you have a specific character concept in mind which is not supported, hopefully you have a DM willing to let you work around this. I can also see why some people enjoy the challenge of making a character work within the imposed limitations, and even seeing how different they can make it compared to another player's vision of the same class/subclass.
I will say this, as much as I am a fan of skill based systems with more breadth of choice than class based systems, the limitations posed by class/subclass are, as a generalisation, better for gameplay, because the restrictions are far more reliable at giving structure to games.
As said though, whether you find the restriction appealing or not is entirely up to you. I reckon though if people want to make a mess, let them.
They were actually given the optimal schools of magic that most match what those two classes are going to be doing naturally as an enhancement of their class as it exists and that was a good and practical choice as well as a thematic one because it's what most players are going to want to start with. specially new players.
I'd agree that this is true for the Arcane Trickster. But much of Evocation is built around benefitting from up-casting. Even a half caster with access to wizard spells would be underwhelming if they focused on evocation. It might fit somewhat thematically, but it doesn't make a lot of sense mechanically.
Your need for this so called "Natural pick" is half the problem here.
I mean, Im the one saying "why shoehorn them to begin with," while you just argued that a 2 school limit is a natural pick. I understand you are applying it at two different levels, but I am the one for player choice here. I'd rather get away from forcing the player to hold onto a spell like burning hands if they really wanted more of an illusionist style fighter or something based around schools other than abjuration and evocation. They get so few spells and spell slots to begin with that it would hardly be an issue. And for new players, there can just be a blurb about how traditional examples of EK's focus on abjuration and evocation.
I in no way argued that the 2 school limit is a natural pick. That is a twist your forcing onto what I said to make them sound contradictary. The idea of a natural pick is a somehow perfect choice for most if not all situations. Which is not what I said by the mention of the two school chosen. I said they were the ones that most fit what the classes do naturally. This is very different from saying, "These Two schools are going to solve just about every common situation." which is what all "natural pick" arguments revolve around. The best pick just about all the time under as many circumstances as possible. You can't get thta even if you did remove the school restrictions because there is no such thing. No matter how much optimizers try to make claims to the contrary.
They were actually given the optimal schools of magic that most match what those two classes are going to be doing naturally as an enhancement of their class as it exists and that was a good and practical choice as well as a thematic one because it's what most players are going to want to start with. specially new players.
I'd agree that this is true for the Arcane Trickster. But much of Evocation is built around benefitting from up-casting. Even a half caster with access to wizard spells would be underwhelming if they focused on evocation. It might fit somewhat thematically, but it doesn't make a lot of sense mechanically.
Yes and no. There are spells in both schools that can benefit from upcasting. And I can name more than a dozen 1st-through-3rd-level abjuration and evocation spells which receive no benefit from being cast with a higher-level spell slot.
If we remove upcasting from the equation, if for no other reason than it simply being uneconomical, then what we're left with is a lot of utility. Two of them are rituals, so they can also be acquired via other means, but there are plenty of ways to mix and match.
They were actually given the optimal schools of magic that most match what those two classes are going to be doing naturally as an enhancement of their class as it exists and that was a good and practical choice as well as a thematic one because it's what most players are going to want to start with. specially new players.
I'd agree that this is true for the Arcane Trickster. But much of Evocation is built around benefitting from up-casting. Even a half caster with access to wizard spells would be underwhelming if they focused on evocation. It might fit somewhat thematically, but it doesn't make a lot of sense mechanically.
Yes and no. There are spells in both schools that can benefit from upcasting. And I can name more than a dozen 1st-through-3rd-level abjuration and evocation spells which receive no benefit from being cast with a higher-level spell slot.
If we remove upcasting from the equation, if for no other reason than it simply being uneconomical, then what we're left with is a lot of utility. Two of them are rituals, so they can also be acquired via other means, but there are plenty of ways to mix and match.
Sure, but again, being locked into abjuration and evocation means limiting utility. Abjuration is great, but the longer the campaign goes, the worse the EK's low spell slot evocation spells get. And even the ones with control possibilities get worse if the EK decides not to max out Int.
They were actually given the optimal schools of magic that most match what those two classes are going to be doing naturally as an enhancement of their class as it exists and that was a good and practical choice as well as a thematic one because it's what most players are going to want to start with. specially new players.
I'd agree that this is true for the Arcane Trickster. But much of Evocation is built around benefitting from up-casting. Even a half caster with access to wizard spells would be underwhelming if they focused on evocation. It might fit somewhat thematically, but it doesn't make a lot of sense mechanically.
Yes and no. There are spells in both schools that can benefit from upcasting. And I can name more than a dozen 1st-through-3rd-level abjuration and evocation spells which receive no benefit from being cast with a higher-level spell slot.
If we remove upcasting from the equation, if for no other reason than it simply being uneconomical, then what we're left with is a lot of utility. Two of them are rituals, so they can also be acquired via other means, but there are plenty of ways to mix and match.
Sure, but again, being locked into abjuration and evocation means limiting utility. Abjuration is great, but the longer the campaign goes, the worse the EK's low spell slot evocation spells get. And even the ones with control possibilities get worse if the EK decides not to max out Int.
You're already limited. At most, you can only learn 13 slotted spells as a pure Eldritch Knight; barring feats or racial traits. And you can only concentrate on one spell at a time when half (or more) of your spells might require concentration. If you really want to tank Intelligence, there are more than enough potential spells to choose from where your Intelligence bonus isn't going to matter. But if you'd rather invest in it, then it's a good thing that fighters get more ASIs than anyone else.
I get being unhappy and wanting more; especially in the face of continual power creep. But the Eldritch Knight simply doesn't have the problems you say it does.
I think one aspect that gets overlooked so often regarding EKs is that they have spellcasting, and therefore can make use of spell scrolls. More than that, they can scribe scrolls if they have proficiency in arcana. Fighters very often have little use for gold outside of buying their armor. But you can buy 1st lvl scrolls for 75 gp, or make your own for 50 gp and some downtime days. This even comes in handy when you want to have access to certain spells like feather fall but prove very niche to justify learning it. Just buy 5 feather fall scrolls, for example, and it'll be a long while before you run out. Buy several of longstrider, several of jump, these don't require concentration and can stack their effects with each other. Since I play with my EK with a greatsword, I have a free hand at any time to grab a scroll and use it as a reaction. Ever wonder what it's like to have 50 shield or absorb element scrolls? It's like nothing can ever touch you aside from a crit.
Also, as an EK you can have access to Find Familiar. What an awesome asset! You can scout with the spider, grant advantage in combat safely with the owl, or use the bat to tell you if any invisible enemies are coming from 60 feet away, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. That alone greatly enriches your play in t1 and t2. Meanwhile, in t3 you get to haste yourself and hardly fail the concentration check thanks to your CON save proficiency. People are amazed once they see a hasted PAM+GWM EK doing 5 attacks in a round in t3. Access to longstrider, misty step, and haste means you have un-matched mobility compared to any other fighter. Imagine moving and dashing twice and misty steping to cover a total of 270 ft in a single turn!
High AC, high mobility, high utility, high damage-- what's not to love?
It can be really hard to find enough days to make a meaningful number of spell scrolls, even if they are just 1st level. And it would totally be up to the DM to let you find useful scrolls to purchase and then to purchase them in any quantity.
Its an interesting aspect, but it isn't a giant leap in power for the EK.
I forget, not everyone is familiar with the wonderful joys of playing AL, where you're guaranteed gold after every session (to a cap) and downtime (after leveling up). Listen, it's wonderful knowing you have your rights in buying scrolls and the DM cannot rightfully tell you no. in AL, your party composition is not known to you beforehand for the most part. It's great to come as prepared as you are.
And man, it is a giant leap in power when you're the fighter who comes with an arsenal of scrolls in their batman-belt. And your familiar is your little Robin. It's true, though. EK is not the most offensively powered fighter in the game, that honor would go to Samurai. Hands down, however, the strongest defensively. It's magic enough if you use every tool in your arsenal and use your tools to their fullest extent.
Fun fact, at higher levels if a fighter gets planeshifted to the plane of fire, for example, that's it. Not for an EK! Cast banishment on yourself and it's k.
Fun fact, at higher levels if a fighter gets planeshifted to the plane of fire, for example, that's it. Not for an EK! Cast banishment on yourself and it's k.
That's an interesting take on Banishment as an escape spell, though the downside is that you can't choose to fail the save against it, though a DM outside of AL might rule otherwise, RAW you need to be ready to burn multiple attempts at it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I'm having fun playing an EK, but like many others have said, I think it has a lot to do with the type of character you wanna play. I made a fighter this campaign because I wanted to see what that side of the fence was like. If I wanted to do a ton of damage with my spells, I'd have made another spellcaster (I was a druid in my last campaign). All in all, this subclass is limited, it's true, but it has some great tanking/defensive/support spells. I like that my spells support just that - a support role. If you want to play someone who is equally balanced in melee and spellcasting, it's probably a better idea to pick a Paladin, or multiclass.
Im thinking I'll have a fun time with Eldritch Knight by going 8 levels, then multi-classing into war mage the rest of the way, like a better melee bladesinger of a gish character.
This ended up being a rather impressive play on the class, though this does run into similar problems as described above - The Soulknife - kudos to LudicSavant of GITP forums.
The aforementioned build (it’s basically a DEX-focused EK) is really good to make usage of cheap but great spells. You are able to slightly boost your AC through Mage Armor (once you get DEX 18-20), also remembering that you have awesome defensive spells like Shield, Absorb Elements and PFE&G.
On the offense side, you can abuse Shadow Blade without moderation. 2d8 + DEX mod + 2 (Dueling) x 4 (Action Surge) is very good damage. And since you are using one-handed weapon, you can still carry a shield to sky rocket your AC even more.
From level 3-4 Booming Blade will be better than one attack action. From level 5-6 attack action twice will be better. From level 7-10 War Magic with Booming Blade and bonus action attack will be better again. From level 11 regular attack action three times will always be better.
However, if you manage to get War Caster feat somehow, Booming Blade is tremendously good for your OA.
Can you help me understand why regular attacks are better at level 11, because my math (which may be wrong) is saying otherwise.
3 attacks with a long sword is easy enough, it's going to be on average 34.5 damage (1d8+5[STR MOD]+2[Dueling])x3
Both Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade do 32 damage *without the trigger*. Basically 1d8+5 [STR MOD] +2[Dueling] from the normal weapon attack that's part of the cantrip description gives you 11.5. You get another 9 from the 2d8 from the cantrip itself and then another 11.5 from your bonus action attack granted from War Magic. If you trigger movement on Booming Blade, you get an additional 3d8, so on average 13.5 damage. If there's another target within 5 feet of the creature you strike, you get 2d8+ your INT Mod, so 9-14 additional damage.
Using a great sword or a maul doesn't effect things too much...just changes the regular attack to 36
So whenever there is a second enemy within 5 feet, is green flame blade not always superior...even at level 20? Booming blade is debatable, triggering movement may be difficult. However, if you're fighting an enemy without ranged attacks, it may be worth it to attack and potentially move them 5 feet with the crusher feat or just take the op attack and if they don't have reach, they have to choose between 3d8 damage or a wasted action
Even Shadow Blade doesn't quite over tack the total damage with the trigger. It would do, roughly 48 damage on average vs 41 before the trigger, so again, if you had another enemy close by or wanted to control the movement of your target, you're probably going to over take the 48 damage. Not to mention, a x3 Shadow Blade vs using Haste lowers the gap before the trigger even more.
I think the only thing that swings it towards 3 attacks would be Great Weapon Master, for the +10 damage. But at that point, your taking a pretty solid risk.
Now where the math leans towards not using the cantrip, is if you are likely to miss. A miss there is devastating to your damage per round because it's basically two misses.
Yeah, pretty much GWM, but the math backs up the decision to go with GWM regular attacks if the AC's appropriate.
Suppose you have a to hit bonus of +9 at lvl 11. If you use GWM, with a greatsword and 20 STR, that's 66 potential DPR. but of course, we gotta account for the -5 to hit. If the target AC is 16, that's 29.7 DPR. If you don't trigger the bonus damage, using your set up, 32 against a 16 AC nets you an average of 22.4 DPR. Against a target with 20 AC, BB/GFB with no bonus does 16 DPR, while the same GWM build does 16.5, but if we get to targets with 21 AC and higher, then we see BB/GFB pull ahead.
Basically, for most ACs the GWM build does more. Furthermore, 99% of the time, it's more advantageous to focus all your damage on one target than spread it out between two targets. Sure, your DPR may in fact be up to par with other builds, but if it's spread out then it doesn't help with thinning out enemy action economy as much as the players who put all that DPR onto the same target.
Yeah, pretty much GWM, but the math backs up the decision to go with GWM regular attacks if the AC's appropriate.
Suppose you have a to hit bonus of +9 at lvl 11. If you use GWM, with a greatsword and 20 STR, that's 66 potential DPR. but of course, we gotta account for the -5 to hit. If the target AC is 16, that's 29.7 DPR. If you don't trigger the bonus damage, using your set up, 32 against a 16 AC nets you an average of 22.4 DPR. Against a target with 20 AC, BB/GFB with no bonus does 16 DPR, while the same GWM build does 16.5, but if we get to targets with 21 AC and higher, then we see BB/GFB pull ahead.
Basically, for most ACs the GWM build does more. Furthermore, 99% of the time, it's more advantageous to focus all your damage on one target than spread it out between two targets. Sure, your DPR may in fact be up to par with other builds, but if it's spread out then it doesn't help with thinning out enemy action economy as much as the players who put all that DPR onto the same target.
Thanks for doing the math on accuracy!
But keep in mind that if it's GWM that puts you over the top, you can still apply GWM to your bonus action attack. I mean...you can apply GWM on your BB or GFB, but unless I had advantage I probably wouldn't (did the math after posting...using GWM with either cantrip is a damage loss at 16 AC).
So with accuracy included, with the +9 to hit and a 16 AC, 3 hits with GWM will do 29.7 DPR to potentially one target
An EK using GFB and following it with GWM would do 24.6 DPR to one target.
Triggering Booming Blade, ups that to 38.1 to one target, but admittedly, there is no guarantee you'll trigger the effect.
Triggering Green-Flame Blade, ups your DPR to 33.6 by adding 9 (add an additional 1-5 for INT Mod), but again, you run into the issue of action economy.
If you're goal is to be a bit tanky, it may make sense to either immobilize your target with BB or if you have two hostiles engaged, trading 5 damage for around 10 or so may be worth the trade just due to the amount of damage your doing to the initial target.
Yeah, pretty much GWM, but the math backs up the decision to go with GWM regular attacks if the AC's appropriate.
Suppose you have a to hit bonus of +9 at lvl 11. If you use GWM, with a greatsword and 20 STR, that's 66 potential DPR. but of course, we gotta account for the -5 to hit. If the target AC is 16, that's 29.7 DPR. If you don't trigger the bonus damage, using your set up, 32 against a 16 AC nets you an average of 22.4 DPR. Against a target with 20 AC, BB/GFB with no bonus does 16 DPR, while the same GWM build does 16.5, but if we get to targets with 21 AC and higher, then we see BB/GFB pull ahead.
Basically, for most ACs the GWM build does more. Furthermore, 99% of the time, it's more advantageous to focus all your damage on one target than spread it out between two targets. Sure, your DPR may in fact be up to par with other builds, but if it's spread out then it doesn't help with thinning out enemy action economy as much as the players who put all that DPR onto the same target.
Thanks for doing the math on accuracy!
But keep in mind that if it's GWM that puts you over the top, you can still apply GWM to your bonus action attack. I mean...you can apply GWM on your BB or GFB, but unless I had advantage I probably wouldn't (did the math after posting...using GWM with either cantrip is a damage loss at 16 AC).
So with accuracy included, with the +9 to hit and a 16 AC, 3 hits with GWM will do 29.7 DPR to potentially one target
An EK using GFB and following it with GWM would do 24.6 DPR to one target.
Triggering Booming Blade, ups that to 38.1 to one target, but admittedly, there is no guarantee you'll trigger the effect.
Triggering Green-Flame Blade, ups your DPR to 33.6 by adding 9 (add an additional 1-5 for INT Mod), but again, you run into the issue of action economy.
If you're goal is to be a bit tanky, it may make sense to either immobilize your target with BB or if you have two hostiles engaged, trading 5 damage for around 10 or so may be worth the trade just due to the amount of damage your doing to the initial target.
Ima say something, even with the mathematical conclusion: Even looking at a disparity of 7 DPR between a GWM build and BB/GFB dueling+shield build, that's honestly not bad. In fact, when you really get down to it, that 7 disparity is just the worst case scenario, cause the average is you're gonna trigger the bonus damage some of the time. When? Who knows, but it's definitely not never. Now, the disparity does get bigger the lower down in AC you go, but honestly, what kind of low AC monster is that much a threat, eh?
75% of a GWM build under circumstances that matter? That's pretty good. It opens up that feat slot for something else. It means you get to be tankier. I'd say that's easily worth it.
Yeah, pretty much GWM, but the math backs up the decision to go with GWM regular attacks if the AC's appropriate.
Suppose you have a to hit bonus of +9 at lvl 11. If you use GWM, with a greatsword and 20 STR, that's 66 potential DPR. but of course, we gotta account for the -5 to hit. If the target AC is 16, that's 29.7 DPR. If you don't trigger the bonus damage, using your set up, 32 against a 16 AC nets you an average of 22.4 DPR. Against a target with 20 AC, BB/GFB with no bonus does 16 DPR, while the same GWM build does 16.5, but if we get to targets with 21 AC and higher, then we see BB/GFB pull ahead.
Basically, for most ACs the GWM build does more. Furthermore, 99% of the time, it's more advantageous to focus all your damage on one target than spread it out between two targets. Sure, your DPR may in fact be up to par with other builds, but if it's spread out then it doesn't help with thinning out enemy action economy as much as the players who put all that DPR onto the same target.
Thanks for doing the math on accuracy!
But keep in mind that if it's GWM that puts you over the top, you can still apply GWM to your bonus action attack. I mean...you can apply GWM on your BB or GFB, but unless I had advantage I probably wouldn't (did the math after posting...using GWM with either cantrip is a damage loss at 16 AC).
So with accuracy included, with the +9 to hit and a 16 AC, 3 hits with GWM will do 29.7 DPR to potentially one target
An EK using GFB and following it with GWM would do 24.6 DPR to one target.
Triggering Booming Blade, ups that to 38.1 to one target, but admittedly, there is no guarantee you'll trigger the effect.
Triggering Green-Flame Blade, ups your DPR to 33.6 by adding 9 (add an additional 1-5 for INT Mod), but again, you run into the issue of action economy.
If you're goal is to be a bit tanky, it may make sense to either immobilize your target with BB or if you have two hostiles engaged, trading 5 damage for around 10 or so may be worth the trade just due to the amount of damage your doing to the initial target.
Ima say something, even with the mathematical conclusion: Even looking at a disparity of 7 DPR between a GWM build and BB/GFB dueling+shield build, that's honestly not bad. In fact, when you really get down to it, that 7 disparity is just the worst case scenario, cause the average is you're gonna trigger the bonus damage some of the time. When? Who knows, but it's definitely not never. Now, the disparity does get bigger the lower down in AC you go, but honestly, what kind of low AC monster is that much a threat, eh?
75% of a GWM build under circumstances that matter? That's pretty good. It opens up that feat slot for something else. It means you get to be tankier. I'd say that's easily worth it.
Nice...it just seemed like everyone was speaking as though it's a forgone conclusion and I wasn't sure if I misunderstood something.
To be honest I'm not sure how it could have been done well.
It's a fighter, and subclasses are so minor that the main class is the only thing which really matters. If EK had been given satisfying combat magic it would have ended up OP because it still has action surge, tons of ASI's, and 4 attacks. It's the entire issue with 5e's subclass system. A subclass will always be completely overwhelmed by the main classes mechanics.
It's why I'm desperate for a swordmage full class, but at this point I'm 100% sure it's never coming.
Give EKs a cantrip whenever they take the attack action. So yes, 4 attacks + 1 cantrip.
Let EKs cast their spells into their weapons, such that a hold person spell cast into their weapon will affect the next person the weapon hits, with the DC being based on the EKs attack modifier (str/dex).
yes
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hey! I make (what I believe to be, could use some feedback) good homebrew!
A "mess" that gives players a lot more flexibility to create the characters they want to play. Sounds like a good thing to me. There's nothing inherently problematic about a roguish evoker or a fighter/illusionist and that inflexibility comes at the expense of literally any other character concept that'd otherwise fit the framework.
Sorry, but your suggestion here was fantastic.
The restriction of school is yet another reason why the subclass is unsatisfying. Paladin's and Rangers don't have a restriction like that, and along with their tailored spell lists designed to work well with martial abilities, make far better gishes than the actual gish subclass.
The real question is, where do we stop with the unrestricting?
This is always a fascinating discussion, I could easily transfer The restriction of school is yet another reason why the subclass is unsatisfying to The restriction of proficiencies is yet another reason why the class is unsatisfying and then even further to The restriction of class is yet another reason why the system is unsatisfying.
Giving players freedom of choice is in many ways the fundamental aspect of Role Playing Games, you're taking on a role but you're free to do what you/your character wants. At the same time a lot of those choices are only meaningful in the face of restrictions.
Sometimes building something within limitations can be just as, maybe even more so, satisfying than building something without any limitations. At what point do the limitations become too restrictive though? At what point does choice become too much choice? I think the answer will be entirely up to each person.
I can definitely see why people want more choice in schools available, especially if you have a specific character concept in mind which is not supported, hopefully you have a DM willing to let you work around this. I can also see why some people enjoy the challenge of making a character work within the imposed limitations, and even seeing how different they can make it compared to another player's vision of the same class/subclass.
I will say this, as much as I am a fan of skill based systems with more breadth of choice than class based systems, the limitations posed by class/subclass are, as a generalisation, better for gameplay, because the restrictions are far more reliable at giving structure to games.
As said though, whether you find the restriction appealing or not is entirely up to you. I reckon though if people want to make a mess, let them.
I in no way argued that the 2 school limit is a natural pick. That is a twist your forcing onto what I said to make them sound contradictary. The idea of a natural pick is a somehow perfect choice for most if not all situations. Which is not what I said by the mention of the two school chosen. I said they were the ones that most fit what the classes do naturally. This is very different from saying, "These Two schools are going to solve just about every common situation." which is what all "natural pick" arguments revolve around. The best pick just about all the time under as many circumstances as possible. You can't get thta even if you did remove the school restrictions because there is no such thing. No matter how much optimizers try to make claims to the contrary.
Yes and no. There are spells in both schools that can benefit from upcasting. And I can name more than a dozen 1st-through-3rd-level abjuration and evocation spells which receive no benefit from being cast with a higher-level spell slot.
If we remove upcasting from the equation, if for no other reason than it simply being uneconomical, then what we're left with is a lot of utility. Two of them are rituals, so they can also be acquired via other means, but there are plenty of ways to mix and match.
Sure, but again, being locked into abjuration and evocation means limiting utility. Abjuration is great, but the longer the campaign goes, the worse the EK's low spell slot evocation spells get. And even the ones with control possibilities get worse if the EK decides not to max out Int.
You're already limited. At most, you can only learn 13 slotted spells as a pure Eldritch Knight; barring feats or racial traits. And you can only concentrate on one spell at a time when half (or more) of your spells might require concentration. If you really want to tank Intelligence, there are more than enough potential spells to choose from where your Intelligence bonus isn't going to matter. But if you'd rather invest in it, then it's a good thing that fighters get more ASIs than anyone else.
And do their evocation spells really not suffice? They get access to darkness, continual flame, earth tremor, fire shield, gust of wind, Leomund's tiny hut, Otiluke's resilient sphere, sending, thunderwave, wall of sand, wall of water, and warding wind. And all that barely scratches the stuff that causes damage. If you're not using your bonus action for anything, storm sphere offers up both area control and some consistent damage. What's more, 9/13 of those spells don't care about your Intelligence modifier.
I get being unhappy and wanting more; especially in the face of continual power creep. But the Eldritch Knight simply doesn't have the problems you say it does.
I forget, not everyone is familiar with the wonderful joys of playing AL, where you're guaranteed gold after every session (to a cap) and downtime (after leveling up). Listen, it's wonderful knowing you have your rights in buying scrolls and the DM cannot rightfully tell you no. in AL, your party composition is not known to you beforehand for the most part. It's great to come as prepared as you are.
And man, it is a giant leap in power when you're the fighter who comes with an arsenal of scrolls in their batman-belt. And your familiar is your little Robin. It's true, though. EK is not the most offensively powered fighter in the game, that honor would go to Samurai. Hands down, however, the strongest defensively. It's magic enough if you use every tool in your arsenal and use your tools to their fullest extent.
Fun fact, at higher levels if a fighter gets planeshifted to the plane of fire, for example, that's it. Not for an EK! Cast banishment on yourself and it's k.
That's an interesting take on Banishment as an escape spell, though the downside is that you can't choose to fail the save against it, though a DM outside of AL might rule otherwise, RAW you need to be ready to burn multiple attempts at it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I'm having fun playing an EK, but like many others have said, I think it has a lot to do with the type of character you wanna play. I made a fighter this campaign because I wanted to see what that side of the fence was like. If I wanted to do a ton of damage with my spells, I'd have made another spellcaster (I was a druid in my last campaign). All in all, this subclass is limited, it's true, but it has some great tanking/defensive/support spells. I like that my spells support just that - a support role. If you want to play someone who is equally balanced in melee and spellcasting, it's probably a better idea to pick a Paladin, or multiclass.
Can you help me understand why regular attacks are better at level 11, because my math (which may be wrong) is saying otherwise.
3 attacks with a long sword is easy enough, it's going to be on average 34.5 damage (1d8+5[STR MOD]+2[Dueling])x3
Both Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade do 32 damage *without the trigger*. Basically 1d8+5 [STR MOD] +2[Dueling] from the normal weapon attack that's part of the cantrip description gives you 11.5. You get another 9 from the 2d8 from the cantrip itself and then another 11.5 from your bonus action attack granted from War Magic. If you trigger movement on Booming Blade, you get an additional 3d8, so on average 13.5 damage. If there's another target within 5 feet of the creature you strike, you get 2d8+ your INT Mod, so 9-14 additional damage.
Using a great sword or a maul doesn't effect things too much...just changes the regular attack to 36
So whenever there is a second enemy within 5 feet, is green flame blade not always superior...even at level 20? Booming blade is debatable, triggering movement may be difficult. However, if you're fighting an enemy without ranged attacks, it may be worth it to attack and potentially move them 5 feet with the crusher feat or just take the op attack and if they don't have reach, they have to choose between 3d8 damage or a wasted action
Even Shadow Blade doesn't quite over tack the total damage with the trigger. It would do, roughly 48 damage on average vs 41 before the trigger, so again, if you had another enemy close by or wanted to control the movement of your target, you're probably going to over take the 48 damage. Not to mention, a x3 Shadow Blade vs using Haste lowers the gap before the trigger even more.
I think the only thing that swings it towards 3 attacks would be Great Weapon Master, for the +10 damage. But at that point, your taking a pretty solid risk.
Now where the math leans towards not using the cantrip, is if you are likely to miss. A miss there is devastating to your damage per round because it's basically two misses.
Yeah, pretty much GWM, but the math backs up the decision to go with GWM regular attacks if the AC's appropriate.
Suppose you have a to hit bonus of +9 at lvl 11. If you use GWM, with a greatsword and 20 STR, that's 66 potential DPR. but of course, we gotta account for the -5 to hit. If the target AC is 16, that's 29.7 DPR. If you don't trigger the bonus damage, using your set up, 32 against a 16 AC nets you an average of 22.4 DPR. Against a target with 20 AC, BB/GFB with no bonus does 16 DPR, while the same GWM build does 16.5, but if we get to targets with 21 AC and higher, then we see BB/GFB pull ahead.
Basically, for most ACs the GWM build does more. Furthermore, 99% of the time, it's more advantageous to focus all your damage on one target than spread it out between two targets. Sure, your DPR may in fact be up to par with other builds, but if it's spread out then it doesn't help with thinning out enemy action economy as much as the players who put all that DPR onto the same target.
Thanks for doing the math on accuracy!
But keep in mind that if it's GWM that puts you over the top, you can still apply GWM to your bonus action attack. I mean...you can apply GWM on your BB or GFB, but unless I had advantage I probably wouldn't (did the math after posting...using GWM with either cantrip is a damage loss at 16 AC).
So with accuracy included, with the +9 to hit and a 16 AC, 3 hits with GWM will do 29.7 DPR to potentially one target
An EK using GFB and following it with GWM would do 24.6 DPR to one target.
Triggering Booming Blade, ups that to 38.1 to one target, but admittedly, there is no guarantee you'll trigger the effect.
Triggering Green-Flame Blade, ups your DPR to 33.6 by adding 9 (add an additional 1-5 for INT Mod), but again, you run into the issue of action economy.
If you're goal is to be a bit tanky, it may make sense to either immobilize your target with BB or if you have two hostiles engaged, trading 5 damage for around 10 or so may be worth the trade just due to the amount of damage your doing to the initial target.
Ima say something, even with the mathematical conclusion: Even looking at a disparity of 7 DPR between a GWM build and BB/GFB dueling+shield build, that's honestly not bad. In fact, when you really get down to it, that 7 disparity is just the worst case scenario, cause the average is you're gonna trigger the bonus damage some of the time. When? Who knows, but it's definitely not never. Now, the disparity does get bigger the lower down in AC you go, but honestly, what kind of low AC monster is that much a threat, eh?
75% of a GWM build under circumstances that matter? That's pretty good. It opens up that feat slot for something else. It means you get to be tankier. I'd say that's easily worth it.
Nice...it just seemed like everyone was speaking as though it's a forgone conclusion and I wasn't sure if I misunderstood something.
yes
Hey! I make (what I believe to be, could use some feedback) good homebrew!
Click here!
Please tell me what you think!